Playing the devil’s advocate here: Depending on whether you think that 3rd party tracking cookies are a feature that should be opt-out or a bug that should be o

Playing the devil’s advocate here: Depending on whether you think that 3rd party tracking cookies are a feature that should be opt-out or a bug that should be opt-in, it‘s just as plausible to classify this move as a fair defense against Apple, who unilaterally decided to both not allow any other browser on „their“ ecosystem (in case you don‘t know, iOS Chrome is basically just another skin on a decelerated version of Safari because that‘s all they allow) – and then generally blocking all third-party cookies in order to sabotage their competitors. Apple‘s behaviour here is clearly the protectionism of an ecosystem monopolist that’s just as misguided, thinly disguised as privacy feature. Some prior art was when Microsoft made the Do-Not-Track header opt-out instead of opt-in in order to get a consumer edge. The ad industry as a whole decided to ignore the flag just for IE, but there wasn‘t ever a legal case on that disregard of intended behavior IIRC. I‘m not sure though who‘s more evil here and if this kind of circumvention was fair game or went too far.